Insight in the consistency of care pathway of patients newly diagnosed with stage 1A1 cervical cancer

Authors

  • Sujjanna A. L. Manuel Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, City Hospital Nottingham University Hospital NHS Trust, Nottingham, United Kingdom
  • David Nunns Department of Gynecology, Nottingham University Hospital NHS Trust, Nottingham, United Kingdom

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20240768

Keywords:

Colposcopy, Follow up, Hysterectomy, LLETZ, LVSI, Stage 1A1cervical cancer

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to assess the consistency of care pathway in patients diagnosed with stage 1A1 cervical cancer in our hospital.

Methods: Retrospective analysis of care pathway of patients with stage 1A1 cervical cancer over the last 5years 2017-2022 by accessing their electronic records. Data collected were, information given to patients and their GP of cancer diagnosis, access to clinical nurse specialist, patient information leaflet, Multidisciplinary Team review, discussion of treatment following primary LLETZ and follow up.

Results: Total 45 patients were diagnosed with stage 1A1 cervical cancer.  All patients and their GPs were sent letters about their diagnosis and plan for further management   after multidisciplinary team discussion.  Access to clinical nurse specialists noted in 16, and provision of patient information leaflet noted in 9 patient records. Regarding treatment 14 patients had a repeat LLETZ, 7 patients underwent hysterectomy, 5 patients had a second LLETZ procedure followed by hysterectomy and 19 had routine follow up (colposcopy and cervical smear). Follow up of the 33 patients who had LLETZ as definitive treatment, 1patient had recurrence of cancer and 2 patients had low grade dyskaryosis. Histology post hysterectomy, 5 patients had no evidence of CIN, 6 patients showed CIN with complete excision, and no cases of CIN with incomplete excision.  All vault smears were negative for malignancy.

Conclusions: The clinical standards of management were in par with expectations, however, to improve unmet holistic needs (access to information of support groups, clinical nurse specialists, patient information leaflets).

References

Arbyn M, Weiderpass E, Bruni L, Sanjose S , Saraiya M, Ferlay J, et al. Estimates of incidence and mortality of cervical cancer in 2018: a worldwide analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2020;8(2):e191-203.

Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel R, Torre L, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394-424.

Cancer Research UK. Cervical cancer statistics. Available at: https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/statistics-by-cancer-type/cervical-cancer. Accessed DD December 2019.

British Gynaecological Cancer Society (BGCS) Cervical Cancer Guidelines 4th May 2020.

MacNab WS, Holdsworth TF, Lindsay R, Shanbhag S, Siddiqui N, Burton K. The current burden of follow-up of stage 1A1 cervical cancer. J Lower Genit Tract Dis. 2017;21(4):268-71.

SEER data for 2003 to 2007. Available at: http://seer.cancer.gov/. Accessed 02 November, 2010.

Alfsen GC, Thoresen SØ, Kristensen GB, Skovlund E, Abeler VM. Histopathologic subtyping of cervical adenocarcinoma reveals increasing incidence rates of endometrioid tumors in all age groups: a population based study with review of all nonsquamous cervical carcinomas in Norway from 1966 to 1970, 1976 to 1980, and 1986 to 1990. Cancer: Interdiscipli Int J Ame Cancer Soci. 2000;89(6):1291-9.

EUROPEAN society of Gynecological oncology. Guidelines to ca. cx.23.3.2018

Oncology NCPGi. Cervical Cancer. NCCN. 2016; Version 1.2017

Lee SW, Kim YM, Son WS, You HJ, Kim DY, Kim JH, et al. The efficacy of conservative management after conization in patients with stage IA1 microinvasive cervical carcinoma. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scandinav. 2009;88(2):209-15.

Diaz ES, Aoyama C, Baquing MA, Beavis A, Silva E, Holschneider C, Cass I. Predictors of residual carcinoma or carcinoma-in-situ at hysterectomy following cervical conization with positive margins. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;132(1):76-80.

Yoneda JY, Braganca JF, Sarian LO, Borba PP, Conceicao JC, Zeferino LC. Surgical treatment of microinvasive cervical cancer: analysis of pathologic features with implications on radicality. J Int Gynaecol Cancer Soci. 2015;25(4):694-8.

Mota F. Microinvasive squamous carcinoma of the cervix: treatment modalities. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2003;82(6):505.

Ostor AG. Pandora's box or Ariadne's thread? Definition and prognostic significance of microinvasion in the uterine cervix: Squamous lesions. In: Pathology Annual, Part II, Melbourne: Department of Pathology, Melbourne; 1995:103

Bekkers RLM, Keyser KGG, Bulten J, Hanselaar AGLM, Schijf CPT , Boonstra H, et al. The value of loop electrosurgical conization in the treatment of stage 1A1 microinvasive carcinoma of the uterine cervix. J Gynecol Cancer. 2002;12(5):485-9.

Downloads

Published

2024-03-28

Issue

Section

Original Research Articles